MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022529160 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v133i4.2145

A review of the historical and current status of American Beaver (<i>Castor canadensis</i>) on Prince Edward Island, Canada

2020· review· en· W3022529160 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Rosemary Curley, David L. Keenlyside, Helen Kristmanson, Randall L. Dibblee

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersParks Canada
KeywordsBeaverCastor canadensisMainlandGeographyArchaeologyContext (archaeology)HabitatPopulationNative americanEcologyEthnologyHistoryBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evidence supporting the native status of American Beaver (Castor canadensis) on Prince Edward Island (PEI) before European contact in 1534 has yet to be established; however, the postglacial and archaeological records have not previously been reviewed in this context. We demonstrate the coincidence of a land bridge between the mainland and PEI and the occurrence of beavers in the region dating between 9500 and 5000 BP (before present, with present defined as 1950). We provide an archaeological record of 14 beaver incisors in six locations, deposited between 500 and 1650 AD and also show that beavers could swim to PEI. Based on this evidence, we conclude that beavers were native to the province. The current population, originating via reintroductions from New Brunswick, has populated much of the available habitat and engendered considerable controversy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207